Elo, Glicko and Trueskill ratings on replays.springrts.com

[bibim]

The startscript is included in the replay, I think it's how you retrieve the account IDs currently?

The start script at the start of a replay is written by spring. I never realized that this information is from spads. The info I see as springs start script is the one you see, if you run "parse_demo_file.py replay.sdf". Is this what you mean?
If that is it, then that would be just perfect :)

Yes that's what I mean. As you can see here, the account IDs aren't part of the standard startscript format, so it's already an extension added by SPADS.

[dansan]

The startscript is included in the replay, I think it's how you retrieve the account IDs currently?

The start script at the start of a replay is written by spring. I never realized that this information is from spads. The info I see as springs start script is the one you see, if you run "parse_demo_file.py replay.sdf". Is this what you mean?
If that is it, then that would be just perfect :)

Yes that's what I mean. As you can see here, the account IDs aren't part of the standard startscript format, so it's already an extension added by SPADS.

That's very nice. Everyday learning something new about spring and its "environment" :)

I guess that closes the question about chranks: Adding that info to the start script would be the perfect place: It'd be stored in a persistent manner together with the replay and no interface must be changed.

Regarding privacy: I asked some ppl, and I have yet to meet someone who does not want the ranks to be public. I'll keeping asking. Atm I'm favoring a opt-out method for the website(s).

[bibim]

Regarding privacy: I asked some ppl, and I have yet to meet someone who does not want the ranks to be public. I'll keeping asking. Atm I'm favoring a opt-out method for the website(s).

Actually the rank would always be public, but it could be either the exact trueskill value (if privacy is disabled), either the trueskill translated to lobby rank scale (8 values) for example (if privacy is enabled).
If the exact trueskill value is shown, then it reveals all the smurf accounts at the same time because it's very unlikely that 2 different users have exact same trueskill. So if we choose opt-out, it means revealing all smurfs by default.

[Silentwings]

I think it's a bad idea to allow opt outs - but its worth noting that ZK recently decided to hide all its ranking information from all non-admin users because they thought it fueled smurfing & abuse of poor players.

Thanks for those instructions on spads - I'll get hold of it and start playing with it.

[Forboding Angel]

...they thought it fueled smurfing & abuse of poor players.

Gee, ya think? There is a reason bnet is such a shithole of humanity.

[dansan]

If the exact trueskill value is shown, then it reveals all the smurf accounts at the same time because it's very unlikely that 2 different users have exact same trueskill. So if we choose opt-out, it means revealing all smurfs by default.

Except for the top20 in the hall of fame, there is no way to search or sort users by their TS-value. If the accounts get separated pages, I don't see how it is possible to find a 2nd account with the same values.

[dansan]

...they thought it fueled smurfing & abuse of poor players.

Gee, ya think? There is a reason bnet is such a shithole of humanity.

Could you kindly translate that for me? What is "bnet" (and why is it so unfriendly there)?

[Silentwings]

I have no idea what bnet is, but some online games hide ranks and some don't, so there is no clear decision and should wait to see what works.

[knorke]

bnat=battle.net, blizzards online lobby thing for starcraft and such.
dunno how it is unfriendly, especially since you do not even have to use chat to play. join game, play, say "gg", play next game.

[bibim]

I think it's a bad idea to allow opt outs

Can you explain why?

Except for the top20 in the hall of fame, there is no way to search or sort users by their TS-value. If the accounts get separated pages, I don't see how it is possible to find a 2nd account with the same values.

If people have suspicion concerning 2 accounts, they just need to check the 2 accounts TS. Also, I guess it would be quite easy to write a script which retrieves all TS values through HTTP for instance.

[dansan]

If people have suspicion concerning 2 accounts, they just need to check the 2 accounts TS.

Experienced players that can guess a player, could do it with lobby-ranks too. Now they can get a validation of their suspicion, because spads shows the accountid to non-admins. If that is changed, they couldn't anymore.

Also, I guess it would be quite easy to write a script which retrieves all TS values through HTTP for instance.

Determined trolls will always find a way to troll. I don't want to let a few terrorists make the life worse for everyone.

[bibim]

Experienced players that can guess a player, could do it with lobby-ranks too.

They can never be sure, they have no proof, they can hesitate between different players from same country for example. Whereas with exact trueskill values there is no doubt.

Now they can get a validation of their suspicion, because spads shows the accountid to non-admins. If that is changed, they couldn't anymore.

Sorry I didn't get what you mean here...

Determined trolls will always find a way to troll. I don't want to let a few terrorists make the life worse for everyone.

I'm not speaking of trolls, just users who would like to identify smurfs easily. Imo there is no point in hiding smurf accounts if you show exact trueskill values.

[dansan]

Now they can get a validation of their suspicion, because spads shows the accountid to non-admins. If that is changed, they couldn't anymore.

Sorry I didn't get what you mean here...

That was nonsense on my part they don't need the accountid to find a players page, the name is sufficient.

Imo there is no point in hiding smurf accounts if you show exact trueskill values.

If you have a suspicion: yes. But otherwise it's to many accounts to check.

So I was thinking how it would be to strongly round numbers or to even convert them to lobby-ranks, and i came to the conclusion that it would not change anything. The combination players have of 1v1+Team+FFA+TeamFFA-values (and soon a separation of Team-values for 2v2-4v4 and >=5v5) is rather unique - even with lobby-ranks (not to mention the win/losse-ratio). So in the end it'd mean not showing any statistics at all.

I must confess I'm not impartial on this. In my exp. smurfing has done mostly damage, and the TS/statistics-thing has made a lot of ppl happy.
After separating account-pages smurfing will be more difficult only for "high profile players" (that can be guessed). Balancing interests - isn't that "good enough"?

[klapmongool]

Imho smurfing shouldn't be facilitated. If smurfs can be detected because of TS scores please do so.

[bibim]

So I was thinking how it would be to strongly round numbers or to even convert them to lobby-ranks, and i came to the conclusion that it would not change anything. The combination players have of 1v1+Team+FFA+TeamFFA-values (and soon a separation of Team-values for 2v2-4v4 and >=5v5) is rather unique - even with lobby-ranks (not to mention the win/losse-ratio). So in the end it'd mean not showing any statistics at all.

Indeed providing lots of multiple rounded ranks for each user may have the same effect as providing one precise rank and could allow identification of smurf accounts.
What I had in mind was showing only one global rank by mod (ba, zk, etc.) if the user opted-out from public ranking.

I must confess I'm not impartial on this. In my exp. smurfing has done mostly damage, and the TS/statistics-thing has made a lot of ppl happy.

What makes damage is undetected smurfs. If other players and the balancing system know the real skill, smurfing isn't that bad imo.

Balancing interests - isn't that "good enough"?

For balancing the trueskill values would be used anyway, it's just for public presentation on the ranking sites.

[very_bad_soldier]

Is that whole thing really an issue in the first place? I really cant remember having ever seen anyone complaing about showing his TS in public.

[bibim]

Is that whole thing really an issue in the first place? I really cant remember having ever seen anyone complaing about showing his TS in public.

Currently TS is only used on your host, and the players who play on your host might be mostly the ones who enjoy competitive scene (reduced team size). If all autohosts use TS for balancing, maybe players will start to care more about it. Also, I guess the fact that ZK finally hided their ratings shows it has some drawbacks.

In these links you can find this question is raised in popular games too, with various opinions about public ratings:
- Valve vs. DOTABUFF: A War of Statistics
- Dotabuff Rating (DBR) Poll
- League of Legends - Public Statistics
- League of Legends - Public ELO ranking not shown

Personally I would implement an opt-in for public rating (players have to enable public rating manually, otherwise only one lobby-rank equivalent of their trueskill rating by game (zk/ba/etc.) is shown on the ranking sites).
But if majority is for opt-out (players have to disable public rating manually if they want to hide it) I guess it's ok too.
However, be it opt-in or opt-out, I think we have to offer players a way to avoid public ratings.

[Silentwings]

I think it's a bad idea to allow opt outs

Can you explain why?

I think a situation where most people opt in (by default, say) and only a few opt out is recipe for trouble, because the only reasons I can see for opting out are (1) low rank + embarrasment (2) high rank + wanting to pretend not so good. In either case I think the majority of other players would prefer to just see the ratings and it could fuel arguments that way. But I'm guessing here.

(Also, if you were really determined, and you see 7 out of 8 trueskills and also how the lobby has chosen to balance those 8, you can basically infer the 8th.)

Personally I would implement an opt-in for public rating...

If there must be an opt out/in, then I like this idea more than having the default as opt in.

[bibim]

I think a situation where most people opt in (by default, say) and only a few opt out is recipe for trouble, because the only reasons I can see for opting out are (1) low rank + embarrasment (2) high rank + wanting to pretend not so good.

If by (1) you mean someone who just mainly plays for fun and is against competition etc., I see nothing wrong in that. I think we should satisfy such players too.
Concerning (2) it wouldn't be possible anyway, because a lobby-rank equivalent of the trueskill value would be shown (like chranks in !status currently).

(Also, if you were really determined, and you see 7 out of 8 trueskills and also how the lobby has chosen to balance those 8, you can basically infer the 8th.)

I doubt you could be more precise than the lobby-rank equivalent of the TS, which would be public anyway.

[jamerlan]

Trueskill ratings does not shown for some people (tz) http://replays.springrts.com/replay/486 ... a1cdf4421/